By Amadi Johnson, Enugu

Youths in Ugwuaji, Enugu State, under the aegis of Ugwuaji Youths for Peace, have issued a 72-hour ultimatum to the State Commander of the National Forest Guard, Dr Akinbayo O. Olasoji, demanding an explanation over the alleged presence of unidentified men carrying AK-47 rifles alongside Forest Guard personnel in the Ugwuaji forests.The group also questioned the alleged repeated visits of Olasoji to the forest area alongside Ben Alukwu, whom it identified as a chieftain of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC).

The youths claimed that Alukwu was neither an indigene of Ugwuaji nor known to own property in the area, and demanded clarification of his alleged role in the security operations.In a counterstatement signed by Barrister Ogbodo Nwobodo on behalf of the group, the youths responded to a statement issued by the Enugu State Command of the National Forest Guard on October 17, 2026.

They accused the command of failing to address specific allegations of harassment, assault and alleged involvement in land grabbing levelled against Olasoji and personnel under his command.The group argued that references to previous kidnapping incidents and the establishment of a Forward Operating Base in the Ugwuaji–Obeagu forest area did not adequately answer questions about the identities and authority of the armed individuals allegedly operating alongside Forest Guard personnel.

While acknowledging the need to protect residents from kidnapping and other criminal activities, the youths insisted that security operations must comply with the law and remain open to legitimate public scrutiny.They demanded that Olasoji identify the individuals allegedly carrying AK-47 rifles, clarify whether they were officially recruited and trained members of the National Forest Guard or personnel of another recognised security agency, and explain the authority under which they were deployed.The group also requested clarification on the authorisation for carrying the firearms, the identities of those responsible for the deployment and the official records supporting the alleged operation.

On Alukwu’s alleged presence in the forest, the youths challenged the commander to state whether the NDC chieftain held any official appointment within the National Forest Guard or another security agency that authorised him to participate in the operations.They further demanded an explanation of the purpose of the alleged meetings and visits, the identities of those involved and the official documentation establishing their legitimacy.The youths faulted the command for allegedly failing to address these specific questions, maintaining that previous security threats could not, on their own, justify any subsequent action by security personnel without proper explanation.They also argued that residents had a legitimate interest in knowing the identities and official responsibilities of armed individuals operating within their communities, particularly where questions had been raised about their authority.

The group stressed that its demand for accountability was not intended to undermine the work of security agencies or obstruct efforts to combat kidnapping. Rather, it maintained that transparency was necessary to build public confidence and ensure that security personnel operated within their lawful mandate.The youths gave Olasoji 72 hours to address five key issues: the identities and official status of the alleged armed individuals; the authority for their deployment and possession of firearms; Alukwu’s identity and alleged role in the forest visits; whether he held any recognised security appointment or authorisation; and the purpose of the alleged joint visits, supported by relevant official records.

They warned that failure to respond within the stipulated period would prompt them to submit a formal petition, alongside available supporting evidence, to the Office of the National Security Adviser, the Minister of Defence and other appropriate security and investigative authorities.As of the information contained in the statement, the allegations remained claims made by the youths and had not been independently established. The National Forest Guard commander’s response to the specific demands was not included in the material available for this report.